Research Paper thoughts and concerns...

Topic:
Financial scandals; reporting of financial scandals, regulations, Bernie Madoff, AIG

Thesis:
Difference between the reporting on current financial scandals, specially the Bernie Madoff Ponzi scheme and the AIG situation; how newspapers are reporting these two events and if they’re noting the difference between legal banking risk (AIG) and illegal banking schemes (Madoff).
Questions address in paper – Is it important to recognize and report the difference between the two scandals? How are both events being reported? What role does deregulation play in the situation and reporting?

Notes:
I will be using the Wall Street Journal as the source of reporting of these two stories (I will look at a week of reporting about the Madoff story and a week of reporting on the AIG story).
Should I use other reporting regarding these stories? Maybe additional reporting from media outlets such as CNN or Fox News or even bloggers? Or should I strictly focus paper/research on reporting by the Wall Street Journal?
Should I include editorial/opinion pieces from the paper, or stick with the actually news stories from the newspaper?

Research:
One week of reporting by the Wall Street Journal regarding Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme:
- The week was between December 12, 2008 to December 19th, 2008.
- From the four articles that I read from that week I found a running theme in the pieces about the role of the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) in the story. At first, when reporting the story, the news reporters mentioned how Madoff swindled thousands of people over the years and in the end, loss about $50billion in his investors’ money. The interesting thing about the news stories is that quickly the reporters turned the spotlight and even blame away from Madoff and rather shined the light onto the SEC and even the people that believed in Madoff and were fooled by his scheme. The articles bring up a shocking finding that the SEC was made aware of possible illegal actions by Madoff nearly 16 years ago. Each article continued to discuss all the times when other people mentioned that something must be going-on at Madoff’s investment firm and yet each time the SEC did nothing to investigate the suspicions.
- After reading these articles, I wondered how the SEC could have not seen this coming years ago and why they did nothing to stop this man. I also was amazed at the fact that the scheme wasn’t discovered until Madoff himself confessed his crimes to his two sons.
- This made me thing of the role of media, specifically the media’s job as a watchdog. I’m surprised that this story didn’t get news coverage years ago and that the media didn’t discover the scheme before it was confessed.
- The story also brings to light the role of regulations, not in the media but in the banking world. America is the country that is it because people are allowed to be creative and free to be innovated- I believe that regulations definitely hinders people’s ability to be creative; however, what this story proves is that regulations are need more than even today. But, I’m not sure if this is important to my paper; I think that I should be looking at the regulations and deregulations of reporting in the media, rather than in the financial world.
- My biggest problem right now is defining my main point, I’m not sure if I truly understand where I’m going with my thesis and what my argument is.

(image from: http://www.msvu.ca/mediacentre/u-connect/photos/Lightbulb.jpg)

Research Paper Notes...

TOPIC: Reporting of financial scandals throughout US history

QUESTIONS:
- Which financial scandals?
- How am I comparing them?
Specific news outlets
Newspapers, TV programs, or online blogs
Comparing the reporting in general?
- Don’t think I can write ten pages on this??
- What’s my point?

BASICS:
- Scandals =
1.) American International Group (AIG): is a major American insurance corporation based at the American International Building in New York City. Is a major American insurance corporation based at the American International Building in New York City. It suffered from a liquidity crisis after its credit ratings were downgraded below "AA" levels, and the Federal Reserve Bank on September 16, 2008, created an $85 billion credit facility to enable the company to meet collateral and other cash obligations, at the cost to AIG of the issuance of a stock warrant to the Federal Reserve Bank for 79.9% of the equity of AIG.
§ In November 2008 the U.S. government revised its loan package to the company, increasing the total amount to $152 billion. AIG is attempting to sell assets to repay the loans. So far the U.S. government has given the company over $170 billion. (summary from wiki)

2.)PONZI SCHEME: Bernard Lawrence "Bernie" Madoff is an American businessman and former non-executive chairman of the NASDAQ stock exchange who was convicted of operating a Ponzi scheme that has been called the largest investor fraud ever committed by a single person. On March 12, 2009, Madoff pled guilty to an 11-count criminal complaint, admitting to defrauding thousands of investors. Federal prosecutors estimated client losses, which included fabricated gains, of almost $65 billion. (wiki)

a. Original Ponzi scheme: Charles Ponzi (March 3, 1882 – January 18, 1949) was one of the greatest swindlers in American history. His aliases include Charles Ponei, Charles P. Bianchi, Carl and Carlo. The term "Ponzi scheme" is a widely known description of any scam that pays early investors returns from the investments of later investors.

3.)WORLDCOM: WorldCom, one of the big success stories of the 1990s, said late Tuesday it will have to restate its financial results to account for billions of dollars in improper bookkeeping after an internal audit showed transfers of about $3.06 billion for 2001 and $797 million for the first quarter of 2002 were not made in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

4.)ENRON: The Enron scandal was a financial scandal involving Enron Corporation (former NYSE ticker symbol: ENE) and its accounting firm Arthur Andersen, that was revealed in late 2001. After a series of revelations involving irregular accounting procedures conducted throughout the 1990s, Enron was on the verge of bankruptcy by November 2001. A white knight rescue attempt by a similar, smaller energy company, Dynegy, was not viable. Enron filed for bankruptcy on December 2, 2001. (wiki)

- Focus on specific news outlets:
1. News Papers
New York Times
Wall Street Journal
2. News Programs (TV)
Fox News
CNN
3. Talk Radio
Rush Limbaugh

Potential Research Paper Topics…

- The media reform movement over the past few years- how the movement was covered in the media itself in the past and how it is discussed today; how the movement has either grown or slowed down over the years.

- Bernie Madoff – The story of the man who was convicted of operating a Ponzi scheme that has been called “the largest investor fraud ever committed by a single person”; how the story is being covered by newspapers, such as the New York Times, compared to how it is being covered on news programs such as Fox News.

- Reporting of financial stories over the years in the New York Times compared to USA Today; how the ownership of both effects the reporting, etc…

It’s hard getting the word out w/o the media…

YouTube Video!!! - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQcLRIwSXZU

What do you do when the one thing you’re fighting against is the only thing that will help get your word out to the public? There are hundreds of millions of blogs on the internet, it’s the latest crazy. Everyone wants to be a journalist, a writer, and have their opinions out in the cyber-world for others to hear, agree with and even fight against. But these blogs that about the media reform movement are new to me and probably to most people. Maybe it’s because I’ve never really been interested in the topic or maybe it’s that this topic, media reform, isn’t broadcasted on the news or on the radio or the magazines I read. It’s hard getting the word out about a topic when the thing you’re fighting is the media that can help get your word/passion out.

All these blogs have one thing in common; the media reform movement. The Center for Media and Democracy (CMD), Project Censored, and the Institute for Public Accuracy (IPA) have set up websites as a place for them to voice their concerns about the biases and inaccurate reporting going on in the mass media. Founded in 1993, CMD’s mission is to “promote transparency and an informed debate by exposing corporate spin and government propaganda and by engaging the public in collaborative, fair and accurate reporting.” They do the dirt-work for the public, investigating to make sure that they uncover any corruption by the government as well as public corporations. While Project Censored’s objective is to train students in the fields of media research and First Amendment issues, all with the goal of protecting the free press rights of the country.

The main reason why so many blogs with the goal of highlighting the issue with the mass media have sprung up in the past few years is because of one startling fact; since 1983, the number of corporations controlling the vast majority of all news media in the US has dropped from 50 to FIVE in 2004. Today, the control of most of the media industry in the US lies in the hands of five huge corporations – Time Warner, Disney, Murdoch's News Corporation, Bertelsmann of Germany, and Viacom (formerly CBS). – Media reform information center

It’s an obvious problem; power, especially the power to control the public opinion cannot lie in the hands of so few people. It’s a problem that is being brought to light by organizations such as the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD), Project Censored, and the Institute for Public Accuracy (IPA). However, I don’t think they are doing a very good job, because so few people actually know about this problem and never a fewer number of people care about it.

A Welcomed Change…

Most of the articles we have read so far this semester, while being educational were lacking in the department of entertainment. Reading a ten page article took more willpower and energy than writing an actual ten page paper. Instead of trying to comprehend the meaning of the article, finding the author’s point and arguments; it took all my strength to just get through the piece with the vaguest understanding of the main point. This wasn’t the case with Michael Lewis’s article. It may have helped his case that the piece was on an interesting current and relevant topic, the collapse of the Iceland economic system as well as its government. But what Lewis brought to his piece, that the past authors ignored was humor and simple, everyman language. I didn’t need a dictionary in one hand with the article placed in the other. It’s an amazing thing when writers realize that they don’t have to use big words and complex writing that hides their meaning within a maze of a paper. The best, most educational articles that people walk away from with the feeling of actually learning something new, are the ones written with no desire to be anything more than they are. I felt as if Lewis was talking to me about this every complex situation in a way that I and even my little sister could understand. It was new and refreshing; a welcomed change.

To the actual context of the article… “We are Iceland” was a fascinating look at what has occurred in the almost forgot country of Iceland in the past few years. From the ranks of the lost and unimportant, to having a booming economy with outsiders looking in on this unknown land and culture. After reaching an unimaginable peak with the rapid expansion of their banking system, Iceland reached the depths of horror when they become the center of the “greatest act of madness in financial history.” What’s amazing isn’t that these former fishermen with no financial experience and barely any financial knowledge began making millions, what’s amazing is that no one questioned it. Sometimes - most of the time, when something seems too good to be true, usually is. It seemed like everyone in Iceland became that wife whose husband suddenly starts spoiling her with jewelry, trying to hide his on-going affair. They ignore their instincts because the jewels were just too pretty to give up. I get that they experiences wealth that they never even imaged, but didn’t they realize that it wasn’t going to last forever and when it did finally all fall apart, it wasn’t going to be worth all the previous joys?

One of the reasons why they refused to hear-out and consider the criticism might have been due to their unbelievable desire for individualism. Even when the outside just wanted to help, they refuse to hear out their reasoning; whether due to anger, mistrust or even jealousy. For a country with so limited knowledge in the field of finance, to turn a back on the masses amount of people who tried to warn them of their inevitable future; it just seems so stupid and almost immature. When it seems like everyone but you agrees on something, they are probably right.

The rush to be the first...

The goal of so many news outlets isn’t to be the most accurate or the most professional; their goal is to be the “leaders” for late-breaking news. To claim that their outlet was the first to report a story, the first to break a huge developing account. But have news agencies today become too greedy with their need to be the first and thrown away their need to be accurate and professional? And many even more importantly, how do editors balance the need for speedy news with the need to be right?

Most recently I saw this need to be the leading reporter on a public story when British-born actress Natasha Richardson fell and suffered brain injuries Monday while skiing in Quebec, Canada. When the story broke Monday night, only the few, basic details of the accident were being published by many news outlets. But when Tuesday afternoon rolled around, there seemed to be fifteen differing reports on how the accident occurred and what the condition of the actress was. Some of the more reliable news outlets, such as CNN.com and People Magazine continued to just report the known facts; that the actress was injured in a skiing accident in Canada and was taken to a local hospital for brain injuries. However, news agencies such as TMZ and the New York Post continually updated their websites with reports specifying the injuries, without any specific and reliable information. It seemed like they were making assumptions about the condition for the actress based upon nothing but their own imagination; assumptions that were not only false, but also extremely hurtful to Richardson’s family.

A little after 3:00 on Tuesday, both Time Out New York and Perezhilton.com flashed eye-grabbing headlines that stated that the actress had passed away. No more than 60minutes later, both sites had retracted their statements. Although they were both first to report the news- it doesn’t matter if the news isn’t true. It’s not only that they reported something that wasn’t right; reporting of someone’s death isn’t something that should be thrown around. This story proves that it is best to be accurate, take your time and tripe-check your sources and the stories they are reporting before stating them as fact to the world.

MID-TERM Short Answer

Article - "Dark Green Doomsayers" by George F. Will

From my first reading of the article by George F. Will, I was immediately distracted by the amount of quotes that he included in his article. It is always a good idea to include work by others and relevant quotes by experts on topic one is writing about, but when one page of a one and a half page article is composed of quotes, its a bit of an overload. But the one aspect of Will's writing that makes the amount of quotations almost expectable is that when he does actually write, the humor that he writes with makes the topic readable. Those two aspects are the first things I noticed about the article " Dark Green Doomsayers."
But what is Will even writing about, and more importantly, what is his stance on the topic. The article is about the on-going issue of global warming and about all the theories these scientists have come up with. From the title of the article alone, I could tell that this wasn't just a news article; it wasn't a reporting of new developments in the field. The author, Will's has an opinion on the topic and freely and openly lets everyone who reads the writing see it. He isn't trying to hide his stance and opinion on the issue of global warming and those predicting such disasters as the beginning of a new ice age.
When began reading the article, i did think that it was just a report on the issue of global warming; but after reading the entire article, i realized that it was an article almost making fun at the people who are obsessed with the topic. Will ends the piece with; "Real calamities take our minds off hypothetical ones. Besides, according to the U.N. World Meteorological Organization, there has been no recorded global warming for more than a decade, or one third of the span since the global cooling scare." Will spent the entire article discussing the different beliefs and theories of those scientists who believe that global warming is an immediate threat, than in his last two sentences, made them seem like idiots. I also believe that the author's argument is that the country and its people should be more worried about pressing and real problems such as the economy, rather than be enthralled in the "theory" of global warming.
The article comes from the Washington Post, which is the first sign that the article can be somewhat trusted since the Post is the newspaper with the largest circulation and the oldest paper in the country's capital. Researching the author, my immediate belief that this article was more an editorial piece seems to be correct since George F. Will is a Op-Ed columnist. Will is not a reporter, he doesn't get paid to report the news, he gets paid to write his opinion; but not only to write his opinion, but to make it interesting, entertaining and maybe even controversial. A columnist is a journalists who writes editorials; an editorial is "relating to an article stating opinions or giving perspectives." (wordnet.com) Because the writer of this piece is a columnist, his writing cannot be taken as fact or true because he is without a doubt writing with opinion and an objective or 'spin'. Although he filled his article with lots of quotes from scientists about global warming, he specifically chose those quotes because they made his point stronger by the way that he presented them. Even just Googling the article, I found it reposted in numerous websites, sites that share Will's point of view, such as; Climate Change Fraud.